Talk:quality

Various by Liulk[edit]

Although the "value" in "general good value" is intended to mean "value" as in "moral value" in a somewhat idealistic setting, the word has too many meanings, one of which easily confuses with price, as in "a deal of a good value", or "this discount makes the product a good value." I think it is clear that discounts have no to do with changing in standards. I'm deleting this entry. --Liulk 05:45, 19 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to argue that "level of excellence" is the original intended meaning of "general good value" and should be uncountable. The example "this product is made in three qualities" is inappropriate, because it (1) makes a countable use of the word, and (2) refers to attributes (albeit unspecified) that distinguishes the product. This should be an example of the definition "a property or attribute that differentiates a thing or person," but we already have enough examples there, rather quality examples that enumerates the concrete qualities. --Liulk 06:16, 19 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

"The qualities of an evildoer include meanness, hatefulness, a hunger for violence and a love for the spilling of blood." Is this example rated G? While it is nice to show that negative qualities can exist, I think we should think about something more benign. --Liulk 06:44, 19 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The examples for archaic use of "quality" are perhaps lacking in emphasis of "high social position." I'm modifying these examples slightly to reflect the sense of social position. --Liulk 15:36, 19 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I recall having heard (hey, source needed) that the term qualitas was introduced/invented in Latin language by some Roman who wanted to translate a term used by a Greek philosopher. It derives from qua (what), so fundamentally the "what-ity" or "what-ness" (how it is, what it is, the kind, essence or nature of some object). Such a reference would help people understand the distinction qualitative/quantitative, as used in math and statistics. --LA2 00:26, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Candidate definitions; building material
No.	Definition	Note
1.	The correspondence between a goal and its outcome -- between intent and result of action.	Entered on 8, 5 November 2005. I have deleted this definition, as it seems to define success, not quality, although the two concepts are related. --Daniel Polansky 16:29, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Kept. See archived discussion of February 2009. 07:07, 27 February 2009 (UTC)